• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

VisionFromFeeling - General discussion thread

So will you now accept that your statement "I can always detect medical information at any time and it requires no effort from me"? has been falsified. Yes or no, not a wall o' text please.
As a statement, that was based on past experience with the claim, it no longer holds that I can always detect medical information at any time and it requires no effort from me. I have since had other experience that indicates otherwise. I now know that there are cases where I don't detect one way or the other or that it takes very long time to form a perception, and I do know that it does require effort! It is a learning process. My statements can only be based on past experiences. If I had never encountered not being able to form a perception and it taking no effort, then how could I then argue otherwise? But I now can.

The major problem I see is that Anita could have used her ability to detect implants inside the body and her ability to sense pain instead of her ability to sense which kidney was missing. After all, she says those types of things occur automatically, and she has to consciously try to block them. That would have been cheating! :jaw-dropp
What? I think this is funny.

By the way, to my recollection I did not notice a leg brace or a scar on subject 24, but I did notice the tattoos, but I thought to myself that tattoos do not indicate missing a kidney. But I acknowledge that I might have seen the leg brace or the scar on the arm without being aware of that and I even go as far as saying that the results of trial 2 are disqualified. See? I am reasonable? And if you think that detecting Dr. Carlson's left kidney missing could have been a false memory, don't you think I would have acknowledged that? Just think about it for a moment. There is the possibility that I could have had prior knowledge of subject 24 or seen the leg brace or scar, even though I don't think that was involved, and here I am disqualifying the results of that trial where I knew I was correct! Just like that! If there was any chance that the Dr. Carlson incident could have been a false memory, I would be disqualifying that anecdote also. But it was not a false memory. I did it. And I do believe I did it in trial 2 again and without any clues, but even at that, trial 2 is disqualified because of information leakage before the test.
 
As a statement, that was based on past experience with the claim, it no longer holds that I can always detect medical information at any time and it requires no effort from me. I have since had other experience that indicates otherwise. I now know that there are cases where I don't detect one way or the other or that it takes very long time to form a perception, and I do know that it does require effort! It is a learning process. My statements can only be based on past experiences. If I had never encountered not being able to form a perception and it taking no effort, then how could I then argue otherwise? But I now can.

Anita, if you plan on spending your entire life chasing down every perception that you think "might" be possible, and trying to falsify it, then you really are going to waste what otherwise might be a productive, positive and perhaps important life, if your intelligence is what it mostly appears to be (apart from your tendancy to believe in everything woo).

That is your decision, and to be blunt, I don't respect it, but I really do think it is a waste of a human mind to do what you are doing when there is so much real stuff out there in the world that needs further investigation by intelligent minds. Look for a cure for AIDS or something really important. Blind alleys are called that simply because that is what they are.

Norm
 
Anita, if you plan on spending your entire life chasing down every perception that you think "might" be possible, and trying to falsify it, then you really are going to waste what otherwise might be a productive, positive and perhaps important life, if your intelligence is what it mostly appears to be (apart from your tendancy to believe in everything woo).

That is your decision, and to be blunt, I don't respect it, but I really do think it is a waste of a human mind to do what you are doing when there is so much real stuff out there in the world that needs further investigation by intelligent minds. Look for a cure for AIDS or something really important. Blind alleys are called that simply because that is what they are.

Norm
Thank you for caring. And as a matter of fact, I will be researching a cure for HIV in my career. What I do on my spare time may not be as productive in scientific advancement, but neither is gardening, pets, painting, listening to music, watching television, sleeping and eating, and other random things we should all stop doing.
 
<snip>Unfortunately I have other data that I can't share with you because I did not record them in a way that would make them official. There is an interesting experience and it is still under investigation. Sorry.

"Official"? All you have ever offered are anecdotes. Hardly an "official" record, :rolleyes:
 
Unfortunately I believe I have other data that I can't share with you prove anything to anyone including myself because I did not record them in a way that would make them official. To me There is an interesting experience and it is still under investigation I have an irresistible compulsion to continue to involve other people in my obsession. Sorry.

I fixed it for you. I think you need some perspective. You know that nobody is interested in your claims. The claims are just, well, noise. You know the only reasons anyone engages you at all is to ridicule your ridiculous behavior or to give it one last try to make you see the light.

At this point it is abundantly clear that this is simply a grab for attention. You'd rather be infamous than forgotten, which is they you continue. There's nothing of interest left for you to say.
 
As of right now? I probably read an old post.She's 28, that's strange as well. I was 21 when I went and I felt a little old. Most of the students in the Physics program were fresh out of high school. It's not usually a program you decide to go back to school for after working at Wal Mart for a few years.

I worked at an arcade for a few years and then went back to get my math degree at 25 and graduated with it from UCLA just before turning 30.

She's into scalars now. This is awesome.
 
I worked at an arcade for a few years and then went back to get my math degree at 25 and graduated with it from UCLA just before turning 30.

She's into scalars now. This is awesome.

BTW I went to UC Berkeley. Hooray for the UC system! Although I hear it is now horribly underfunded. As an alumnus, how do you feel about the UCLA school color of light blue, being changed to a dark navy blue officially titled "Adidas Blue" in return for lots of money from Adidas?

I was really suprised about the scalar thing. I can understand trying to pull the wool over people's eyes by talking about atomic vibrations or probability distributions. But scalars and gradients is really just the most random, pulled out of a hat argument for her to make.

I'm sure as a math major, you must have super duper scalar and gradient powers. Who knows what you could accomplish!
 
I worked at an arcade for a few years and then went back to get my math degree at 25 and graduated with it from UCLA just before turning 30.

She's into scalars now. This is awesome.

No easy task. Although being the go to guy when the study group needs beer makes it a little easier. :D

Feel free to drop by the protocol thread and do some stats for us. :)

Plus, you could probably contribute to the guffaws. UY said the claimant was as irrational as Vibrational Algerbra, I said the claims were like complex number theory, imaginary.
 
Larger persons

Note: This is a longer post and may be boring for those of you who don't like analysis of some mental process that yields a felt image of a kidney.

I have also been thinking about how in two trials there was a larger subject and how it took me a lot longer to "feel their kidneys" through them. I was not expecting that, though all my past experience of practicing has been with smaller persons. Dr. Carlson, for instance, in which I claim to have detected that a left kidney was missing, is slender.

Why would I experience that it takes longer to form the experience of feeling a kidney through a larger person? I was certainly and absolutely not expecting this to be the case, especially since it was a surprise to me. Both consciously and subconsciously my mind could not have been prepared for this challenge with larger persons. Yet it happened that way.

I am still curious about what the medical perceptions are, because I experience them as an automatic experience. It is not something I am consciously making up as I go along. That's why I'm curious.

So what is the process that happens when I form a perception of feeling a kidney? Obviously vision is somehow a vital part of it. I need to see the person with my eyes for it to initiate. But in my experience, I need to see in order to have a clear and detailed sense of distance and location to the part of the person I am feeling into. But of course the real reason for needing to see the person could be different from what I think it is, being a vision-to-feeling synesthesia association.

So what am I seeing on a person's back that translates into a feeling of a kidney?

The reason I am asking, is because if it were purely visual, or if it were a purely simple visual process, it would not be harder to construct that feeling of a larger person than of a smaller person. It just would not. Any visual surface-information on a person's back, accessed through ordinary vision, would be equivalent in content for a larger person, as for a smaller person. It would not make any difference whether that person has denser internal tissues, or not. A back is a back.

But that is not what happens.

The only mundane explanation I could find, is that somehow my mind would subconsciously expect a larger person to be more difficult to feel a kidney in, and then adds that variable into the processing. But the reason I doubt that, was because I was so surprised when it happened. And because I was trying my best to feel their kidneys and it still was hard, I mean, if it were a purely fictional and imaginative process without any extent of genuine information intake and processing, I would expect to be more "in charge" of what happens. And to be able to circumvent the difficulty of feeling into larger persons, simply by "really wanting to". And I was on a test, and I really wanted to.

I have confirmed, although perhaps a person can not reliably study their own mind and mental processing, that my logic and my perceptions are two entirely different entities. The logic is what I choose, what I think, what I want. And the perceptions are not what I choose, or what I think, or what I want. The perceptions are what I feel, and often contradict with my logical assumptions - and in most or all such disagreement the perceptions are right and logic is wrong.

The difficulty in feeling through larger persons was a genuine difficulty, and definitely not an expected one, or one that I would be able to control or remove.

Although I shouldn't do this, because there are no things such as the paranormal, if there were an ability of feeling into tissues, it would make more sense for a larger layer to be harder to penetrate through. So I continue the investigation. The only way I know how to study the effect of the size of the person, ie. the thickness of tissue layer that covers a kidney, is to arrange for another test that has no larger persons and note how that affects both my experience of accuracy (ie. my confidence in my answers) and the actual accuracy.

Not to confirm myself as a psychic, because there are no such things. But because this is interesting. Just a thought.
 
Last edited:
Note: This is a longer post and may be boring for those of you who don't like analysis of some mental process that yields a felt image of a kidney. <snip for scroll fatigue>

Let's start with the premise that you do see/feel/experience something. Logic tells us that this something is probably not paranormal but has a rather more mundane explanation. What are these mundane explanations?

Intentional cold reading
Unintentional cold reading
A delusion that has grown more real with time and practice
Synesthesia

The first three can be easily tested. You can start with the IIG results. If that is not conclusive, your next test step is to rule them out completely. If you can rule these out, then (and only then) should you test a less logical explanation.

Synesthesia is automatic and immediate. The IIG test proved that your VFF claim is not. We can therefore rule out synesthesia. Even if you have synesthesia, it can not be shown to be related to your medical perceptions.
 
Why would I experience that it takes longer to form the experience of feeling a kidney through a larger person? I was certainly and absolutely not expecting this to be the case, especially since it was a surprise to me. Both consciously and subconsciously my mind could not have been prepared for this challenge with larger persons. Yet it happened that way.

OK. This makes absolutely no sense at all for a few reasons.

1. She was surprised that larger people were harder to read. She lives in the USA, right? There's no shortage of large people. She's had years in which to look at and "read" large people. It's unacceptable to think that this would be a surprise to her.

2. She didn't even have to "read" the large subjects. The test protocol was set up so that she only had to "read" 5 of the 6 subjects. She reads 5, they all have two kidneys, so the 6th must be her target. If one of those 5 is missing a kidney, then it couldn't be the large subject because she would have already found the right answer.

3. She is a good student. One of the skills of a good student is being a good test-taker. Any good student would recognize my point above in #2. For her to claim she never thought of it would be complete nonsense.

Ward
 
When did I lie? Please provide at least one concrete and accurate example, or cease to accuse me of lying.
* You claimed to have a 4.0. You do not.'

* You said you had affidavits supporting your migraine claims. You did not.

* You said I solicited naked pictures of you and that you never offered anything of the sort. I did not and you did offer topless pictures when you wrote to me, "Do you want to see my boobs if I buy a webcam?"

That's three, which is enough.

You are not a credible person. You have broken promises repeatedly and play very loose with the truth. Here are links to other examples.

http://www.stopvisionfromfeeling.com/Discussion/tabid/294/aff/1/aft/184/afv/topic/Default.aspx
http://www.stopvisionfromfeeling.com/Discussion/tabid/294/aff/1/aft/166/afv/topic/Default.aspx
http://www.stopvisionfromfeeling.com/Discussion/tabid/294/aff/1/aft/131/afv/topic/Default.aspx

Fortunately, your numerous outrageous claims have been debunked and you've failed every test, study and survey.

Why are you still here? You are behaving like an attention whore, so if you don't feel that's accurate, explain how your continued presence here is nothing more than an addict returning to the source of her narcissistic supply.
 
Another rather blunt insistence that I reply Ness36 #2008

The vibrations that I experience feeling, occur to a frequency that is far too high for me to count in order for me to give you, based on my perception alone, a numerical value for cycles per unit of time. I don't know how scientific instruments do it, but I am not capable of taking in the information and electronically translating it into a number, such as 1.256310 Hz.

An easier way for me to express the felt frequencies is to compare them to the pitch of soundwaves. If I can find, or if one of you can find, a computer program that allows you to put together soundwaves and to superimpose soundwaves I could very easily represent my felt vibrations in terms of the tones of soundwaves.

But I do not know whether a soundwave and another form of vibration such as electromagnetic would have any innate immediate correspondence, ie. if a soundwave of frequency 10 Hz corresponds to an electromagnetic wave of frequency 10 Hz.

You are also asking whether I could have a test where I am asked to identify whether something is behind a screen based on feeling its vibration. I have tried similar tests at home. Some work rather well at first, then I quickly get very tired. I find that the felt vibrations of a human body are the strongest and easiest to feel of all things, and health information then is the easiest form of human information among those. So I would be reluctant to attempt a test that involves information that is much harder for me to detect.

And, internal organs should be considered as already behind a screen by being inside the body. Provided that the person does not provide any visible or other clues of their number of kidneys.

So what is the difference between feeling for a kidney that is behind skin, fat, muscle and tissues, and detecting some other object that is behind a fabric or other screen? It is because the body-wall itself is composed of clearly vibrating information. Once I access the vibration of a material, I can construct it into corresponding felt images and move through those. Also, the kidneys are an integral part of that wall. The presence or absence of a kidney involves feeling that is also within the surrounding tissue. A fabric screen is not interwoven with the target object.
 
Last edited:
Vibrations

I appreciate your attempts to get clarity out of Anita but I honestly believe it is a fruitless task. The problem is that you think that the word "vibrations" has a specific meaning in the real, physical world. And you are, of course, correct.

But no matter what words Anita uses to try to link her use of that particular word to physical reality, what she is doing is simply using woo-talk. "Frequency", "higher state", "vibrations", "another level" are all words and phrases that the woo use to give voice to their nonsense. There is no solid, reality-based grounding to the use of these words.

Thus, any attempt on your part to get Anita to clarify what she means is doomed to failure. It's like asking her what the frequency of her feelings is. Not how often they happen, but what "vibration" causes her to feel the presence of, say, a kidney. It is a bogus concept at root so any attempt to clarify it is just adding more hooey to the pile.
Thank you for speculating, but you are as a matter of fact incorrect. (For those of you who don't like this stuff, have the decency to skip it rather than read it through and then complain because you didn't like it. When I don't like some of your posts I skip them rather than complain.)

What I experience is a genuine, although possibly entirely synthetic, experience of vibration. People can have internal experiences that are quite legitimately described as an experience of color, of sound, of taste, or even of vibration, even if all they were were a synthetic experience created by the brain and not derived from the outside world.

For instance, a person might experience sound-hallucinations, a real experience of sound that is indistinguishable from a normal experience of sound, with the only difference being that it was not triggered by the intake of soundwaves from the outside world.

You are suggesting that I am using the word "vibration" in the common way that many woos do, where various abstract conceptions are arbitrarily graded along a scale and assigned a "vibration" based on the person's own and rather subjective assessment of its quality, ie. "good or higher vibrations" and "bad or lower vibrations".

I actually have an experience of vibrations. Of course, "vibration" is a very broad and general term. Sound is vibrations, color and the various forms of electromagnetic radiation are vibrations.

What I feel translates into shapes and landscapes, but they are not smooth surfaces. The landscapes are composed of small-scale vibrations. I actually feel the cyclic nature of those vibrations, so they are not a continuous or straight-line quantity.

If you consider a vibration being a sinusoidal wave, which is the most classical way of representing the physical significance of what a vibration is whether a soundwave, wave of light, or even waves on the water, the sinusoidal wave experiences a repeating pattern of changes within its quantity, or extent.

Electromagnetic radiation, which includes light and color, is actually composed of two interwoven sinusoidal waves, one being an electric field and the other a magnetic field, the intensity of each wave changes continually in a periodic cycle. In the way that sinusoidal waves are drawn, the waviness represents how the intensity, or strength, of the wave keeps changing as time passes. It is one of the fundamental aspects of a vibration, that its intensity changes periodically, in a smooth, repeating manner.

In the electromagnetic wave, the electric field grows stronger as you go uphill in the picture, and then starts to decay as you go downhill again.

So, in terms of its physical significance, a vibration is a quantity with a repeating pattern of changing intensity, growing and decreasing and growing again in a cyclic manner.

The best example of a quantity that is felt, that everyone can relate to, is temperature. Imagine feeling heat over a candle, and cold over icecubes. Then imagine a detailed arrangement of candles and icecubes over a table such that it creates a felt landscape of temperatures. My experience of feeling vibrations is similar, in that it involves feeling a quantity that contains variation which then builds up a landscape that is felt.

The shapes of the feeling correspond to vibrations, however, in that I feel cyclic or periodic changes in the intensities of the vibrational substance. You can imagine feeling a sinusoidal temperature distribution, if you imagine an air conditioning unit that would emit heat, then gradually decrease the temperature until emitting cold, then going up to heat again, in a periodic, cyclic, sinusoidal manner.

If you could feel the quantity of temperature, you might be able to construct shapes and landscapes based on the patterns of temperature variations that you feel. Similarly, I feel a "quantity" that carries patterns of variation that happen to come in vibrational patterns.

Sinusoidal vibration represents the easiest form of vibration, however. Vibrations can be distorted in numerous ways. Here is an example, or here. The distortions within waves can be used in technology to represent information. This can be used to manufacture waves that then travel across a distance, are detected by an instrument and then translated back into the information, by reading the various distortions within the wave pattern into corresponding information, like a language. And we all produce soundwaves, to which we have assigned a meaning, that then travel across distance, are picked up by others, and translated back into significance.

And apart from waves constructed for communication, science also takes advantage of vibrations that already exist within physical reality, since many types of wave-behavior indicate some information about the system that is under study. Visible light is an electromagnetic wave. The different colors depend only on how fast it changes the intensity within the ups and downs in the wave, red does so the slowest, and violet does so the fastest. When visible light hits objects, some of the colors are absorbed by the material and other colors are reflected out, and those that are reflected out and hit our eyes we see and that is one example of how vibrations that are already existing in the world around us give information.

There are also many ways of using vibrations to probe the surroundings. Ultrasound uses soundwaves, and ground penetrating radar uses electromagnetic waves, to form images and "feel out a landscape", a landscape composed of a vibrational pattern.

To feel a vibrational landscape, of any kind, one would either have to send out a wave that interacts with the structural information within the sample, to receive back that wave and read the changes that are in it that reveal the structural information, or vibrational information within the sample is emitted and then received and understood in terms of translating the vibrational patterns into corresponding information.

So what I am saying is that it is possible to feel something best described as a vibrational pattern, and that I am not simply abusing the word. All the little ups and downs, and complex patterns, mean something to me. The felt shapes that come from the vibrational patterns turn into shapes, and landscapes, that turn into information and meaning. For instance, one vibrational structure feels like nitrogen does, and another feels like hydrogen.

The complex landscapes of vibration build up into textures, a feeling of weight, of density, of texture, and touch. And when I feel into the vibrational landscapes that I find across a human body, those felt shapes build up and turn into images of tissues and organs, and an understanding of health.

I can't help it. It just happens. To me, it is probably just an expression of synesthesia, which I have, because to me, letters and numbers also have shapes and colors. But what is uncanny is that I knew that Dr. Carlson is missing a left kidney, and other interesting accurate perceptions that I have had. So that is why I am investigating. Still.

BTW. Brainwaves. See how a vibrational pattern corresponds to the concepts of thought? So you should understand that similarly, if someone were to feel a vibrational pattern, it could translate back the other way into a thought. If their brain does that.
 
Last edited:
The vibrations that I believe I experience and for which I have no evidence whatsoever...

Fixed it for you.

occur to a frequency that is far too high for me to count
Evidence? Maybe they are too low. Maybe you could count them if they, in fact, existed.

An easier way for me to express the felt frequencies is to compare them to the pitch of soundwaves. If I can find, or if one of you can find, a computer program that allows you to put together soundwaves and to superimpose soundwaves I could very easily represent my felt vibrations in terms of the tones of soundwaves.
It would be nothing more than fantasy.

But I do not know whether a soundwave and another form of vibration such as electromagnetic would have any innate immediate correspondence, ie. if a soundwave of frequency 10 Hz corresponds to an electromagnetic wave of frequency 10 Hz.
LOL! Now I understand why you don't play in the science forums.

And, internal organs should be considered as already behind a screen by being inside the body. Provided that the person does not provide any visible or other clues of their number of kidneys.
:big:

So what is the difference between feeling for a kidney that is behind skin, fat, muscle and tissues, and detecting some other object that is behind a fabric or other screen? It is because the body-wall itself is composed of clearly vibrating information. Once I access the vibration of a material, I can construct it into corresponding felt images and move through those. Also, the kidneys are an integral part of that wall. The presence or absence of a kidney involves feeling that is also within the surrounding tissue. A fabric screen is not interwoven with the target object.

You have repeatedly failed to demonstrate that any of this corresponds to reality. To continue talking about it in such a manner is disrespectful to everyone here and reminiscent of an attention whore trying to turn the conversation back to her favorite subject.

C'mon, Anita, it's over. Quit talking about this stuff like it really happens. It's your imagination. Aren't the other people out there you can bore with this stuff?
 
<snip>
Still.

I think that about sums it up. You're still talking. Only your goal now is to get people to tell you how ridiculous your theory is - anything for that narcissistic fix. Your descriptions of real science are iffy at best, but the leap from the real world into your fantasy world is patently ridiculous. It's fantasy.

Have you shared that post with any of your physics professors? I think you should. You know, just to have them check your science.
 
The vibrations that I experience feeling, occur to a frequency that is far too high for me to count in order for me to give you

How do you know the frequency is far too high? How do you know it is not a really slow frequency like 1 vibration per hour? Can you tell the difference between the two? No. Can you tell the difference between an object vibrating at mystery kidney frequency, and no object at all behind a screen? No. So you are not sensing any vibrations.

You are misusing the word vibration. Courtesy of Wikipedia: “Vibration refers to mechanical oscillations about an equilibrium point”. Something must be moving back and forth for there to be vibrations. What is moving?

I can do relative work, though, to compare what I feel with other reference values

You are also asking whether I could have a test where I am asked to identify whether something is behind a screen based on feeling its vibration. I have tried similar tests at home. Some work rather well at first, then I quickly get very tired. I find that the felt vibrations of a human body are the strongest and easiest to feel of all things, and health information then is the easiest form of human information among those. So I would be reluctant to attempt a test that involves information that is much harder for me to detect.

You said you could do it, then you say you can’t!

I claim to be able to tell the difference by touch in a blinded test between:

1.) Object vibrating at heartbeat frequency
2.) Object vibrating at cellphone vibrator frequency.

I can do this correctly 100% accuracy, because I actually feel those vibrations. You refuse to try to tell the difference between :

1 .) nothing behind a screen, and
2. )a person emitting mystery kidney vibrations behind a screen.

According to you “The vibrations of the human body are strongest and easiest to feel”, so why can’t you tell the difference between an empty space with no strong vibrations, and a human with tons of vibrations?

It would take you 10 minutes and a couple of friends to test this in a double blinded fashion. Every minute you take to post on these forums, without doing this test shows you don’t really believe you have any abilities.

Frankly, you are not being a very good representative of your university’s physics department with the things you are writing on this forum. I hope you realize what you are posting is out in google for anyone to read. I would not want be in the position of looking for a job or graduate school, when the internet was full of me getting basic scientific concepts wrong.
 
However, unlike most psychics, VisionFromFeeling has enough knowledge about these concepts to know she is misusing them, and change her explanations, when this is pointed out to everyone.
Ahem. I am not a psychic, nor do I attempt to be. I am simply discussing and investigating an interesting experience. That does not make me a psychic. I do wish you would stop insulting me like that. If I were a psychic, I would, say... provide you with some comprehensive care for *only* $3519.99 per month (plus tax and special fees) and totally getting away with it. Learn to tell the difference. Psychics have clear distinct signs.

First she claims to see vibrations in the body, and said it was the molecular and atomic vibrations.
I still say that. The experience is as if feeling vibrations that the atoms and molecules are made of, because it starts with a feeling of a vibration, that then builds up into feeling of atoms.

I explained why that was impossible due to the high frequency of these vibrations.
The vibrations I feel are high frequency. But, you are looking for real-world correlation, not me.

Then, she claimed to see matter from the electron quantum probability distribution up:
I still say that. The experience includes that also.

Then, I explained why this wasn't possible either, she had a new experience of seeing Scalar and Gradient Patterns.
I still say that. The scalar and gradient patterns are a description of the vibrational information and how that constructs up into a felt pattern.

I explained these were simple math terms and don't really mean anything amazing, and she never mentioned it again.
I would love to mention scalar fields and gradients plenty more times, because I would still describe my experience in terms of that.

Now, she basically admits she doesn't know what it is she is seeing, just some kind of "vibrations".
I've always said that I don't quite know what it is. I just know I feel vibrations, that build up into images.

I think, since she took physics classes, she knows full well the meaning of the word vibrations, and knows she is using it wrong.
Actually, the word vibration adequately describes my experience.

If she doesn't mind people thinking she doesn't know anything about physics, she can keep using it wrong, or she can switch to saying she sees colors and shapes.
Vibrations, scalar fields, gradients, atoms, molecules, cells, tissues, organs, it is all included.
 
For instance, a person might experience sound-hallucinations, a real experience of sound that is indistinguishable from a normal experience of sound, with the only difference being that it was not triggered by the intake of soundwaves from the outside world.

That is called "hearing voices."

What I feel translates into shapes and landscapes, but they are not smooth surfaces. The landscapes are composed of small-scale vibrations. I actually feel the cyclic nature of those vibrations, so they are not a continuous or straight-line quantity.

And that's called "seeing things that aren't there."

They are kind of the same thing.

Ward
 
If you consider a vibration being a sinusoidal wave, which is the most classical way of representing the physical significance of what a vibration is whether a soundwave, wave of light, or even waves on the water, the sinusoidal wave experiences a repeating pattern of changes within its quantity, or extent.

Electromagnetic radiation, which includes light and color, is actually composed of two interwoven sinusoidal waves, one being an electric field and the other a magnetic field, the intensity of each wave changes continually in a periodic cycle.

Vision From Feeling:

Honestly, why do you think that posting a huge lecture about some totally random brand new scientific topic will convince anyone.

Who are you trying to impress by saying that light is made of two orthogonal waves, electric and magnetic. WTFBBQ? That is freshman level physics, if not highschool level?

So far, here are all the topics you have posted huge long essays about, then dropped as soon as someone explained what the concepts really mean, and no one was impressed.

1.) Large scale thermal vibration
2.) Interatomic vibration
3.) Electron probability
4.) Scalars and gradients
5.) Sound waves
6.) Mystery vibrations with no identifiable frequency
7.) Sinusoidal waves (which just means moving up and down like a sin function, Good Lord! You must think we are idiots)

I am looking forward to #8. It is better than clicking on random Wikipedia articles

I can play this game too. What will it be next?

Quantum entanglement. Spin-spin coupling. Collapse of quantum wavefunction. Singularity. Gaussian distribution. Hessian function. Jacobean function. Fourier Transform infrared Spectroscopy. Symmetry group. Nuclear Magnetic resonance. Electron tunneling. Type-M string theory. Non-Degenerate states. ?????

Why aren’t you detecting Phonons? Could that be because you haven’t learned what they are yet? They are a quantum of energy in the form of vibration occurring in a rigid crystal lattice. Surely that must be what you are sensing in a kidney, since you are so sure it has to do with vibrations. It seems to fit perfectly!

Do you not understand that the world and this forum in particular is full of people who have taken as many or more physics classes than you? Don’t try to impress us by explaining basic concepts!
 

Back
Top Bottom